Well, I agree that the test environment should not prevent API improvement: The test environment should simply follow the API as it moves. I see no problem with this change as long as the test environment follows it. I do see a problem, though, if it does not... What structure should the test environment have then? none?
On 23 October 2015 at 14:35, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > *From:* EXT Mike Holmes [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, October 23, 2015 3:22 PM > *To:* Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) > *Cc:* lng-odp > *Subject:* Re: [lng-odp] [API-NEXT PATCH v3 3/7] api: doc: re-organize > doxygen doc for synchronizer > > > > > > > > On 23 October 2015 at 03:00, Petri Savolainen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Removed module synchronizer from doxygen documentation and > introduced new modules for locks, atomics and barriers. > > > > This ripples though the to the validation directory structure which is 1:1 > in sync with the module definitions. > > We should move them at the same time. > > > > This improves a lot documentation readability. It’s nice that validation > suites are named with the same names, but it’s not technically mandatory. > API doc readability is number one goal (visible to all users), validation > suite development is second (visible to implementers). Majority of people > need well documented API and examples, and not validation tests (if they > believe vendor on API compatibility). > > > > -Petri > > > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
